There is Something Fundamentally Wrong with Cheney

And his demon seed has it too.

Dick, Liz Cheney Push 'Undisputed' Claim That Is Actually Wrong
The Huffington Post | By Paige Lavend


Former Vice President Dick Cheney and his daughter, erstwhile Wyoming Senate candidate Liz Cheney, wrote their version of "the truth about Iraq" in an op-ed published by the Weekly Standard.

Among the "truth" the two conservatives dish out in the op-ed is an "undisputed" claim that's actually been disputed several times.

"Those who say the invasion of Iraq in 2003 was a mistake are essentially saying we would be better off if Saddam Hussein were still in power. That’s a difficult position to sustain," the Cheneys write. "It is undisputed, and has been confirmed repeatedly in Iraqi government documents captured after the invasion, that Saddam had deep, longstanding, far-reaching relationships with terrorist organizations, including al Qaeda and its affiliates."

In 2002, the New York Times claimed the Bush administration was "sowing a dangerous confusion" by saying al Qaeda had a relationship with Hussein's regime. In 2004, the 9/11 commission reported it found no "collaborative relationship" between Iraq and al Qaeda. And a 2008 military report released by the Pentagon also showed no connection between the two.

 

I think the whole world understands this was a war for control of oil and nothing else, pretending otherwise might give a comfort blanket to some but for most it's deeply shaming.

 

Is that why America hasn't invaded and occupied countries like Rwanda, Ethiopia, and Somalia...to name a few? Not enough oil production capacity to give a @#$%?

Shameful, indeed.

Control of oil is the reason we do anything in the Middle east. Another example is America's agreements with Saudi Arabia. We offered to provide security to them in exchange for oil, decades and decades ago. Today, that means when the Saudis aren't happy about this country or that, they apply pressure to us to respond. What kind of pressure? Decreased production of oil.

That isn't as effective as it used to be, though. We rely on their oil less now then in decades past. That said, we still rely on it, and so when production of crude is decreased in Saudi Arabia, our economy suffers, via the stock markets and such.

But, the Cheney's are republicans, and insist the invasion of Iraq was to decimate Al Qaeda. The problem with their assertions is that Al Qaeda came to Iraq AFTER America invaded the country. We literally gave Al Qaeda the opportunity to thrive there.

"Shameful" doesn't do that justice. "Stupidity" is more like it, but then again, we are talking about republicans here.

 

Yes, the aptly named Operation Iraqi Liberation was about O.I.L. indeed. The oil fields were the only part of the operation that received any advanced consideration. It was a war by and for the energy industry. No matter the patriotic BS spewed by and for the Right-wingers, none of the changing reasons for going to war ever panned out.

 

Both Reagan and Bush, Sr.'s governments covertly aided Saddam's chemical weapons program. They both provided strategic battle planning knowing Saddam was using chemical weapons on Iranians and Kurds. They even helped develop those chemical weapons for Saddam.

Accusations

 

We're fine with the brutality of sadistic dictators, homicidal juntas, and oppressive theocracies and even collaborate in it as long as they are OUR sadistic dictators, homicidal juntas, and oppressive theocracies.

 

Part of the problem is you guys are as a country, basically owned and run by your oil and defense industries.

 

BINGO!!!! Money is king and those with the money make the rules. Democracy is a cruel joke told to people too dumb to know the true and unwilling to allow themselves the inconvenience of reality.

 

And your preferred government is a dictator?

 

I for one am not advocating a dictator but a return to a democracy would be a good idea don't you think?

 

Tell me about it.

Unfortunately, Whitehall, either directly or as an American proxy, seems to be dominated and driven by many of the same forces and motives as Washington.

 

I assume that in your mind the "dictator" here is Obama.

 

I honestly have absolutely no idea what Mr. RB could possible have in mind.

 

I think that's pretty obvious. But you've never let that slow you down.

 

Not directly through our own industries but by our close ties with the States and there for your puppet masters i.e defense & oil corps.

 

IMO Britain should have dumped that "special relationship" decades ago. Wonder what would happen if you asked America to pull its troops out and turn its bases over to you.

 

Lool we could not afford the ground rent for a start, but in seriousness that's an interesting idea what would the States reaction be if the UK said please leave tomorrow and by the way we refuse to be your poodle anymore?
I think it would do more damage to the states than would be immediately apparent, because apart from us no body else really jumps when the USA says jump sure country's do mostly follow but only because of the perceived military power of the USA and the power of the dollar both of which have taken a bit of a dip over recent years.
I am afraid to say the creditability of the USA abroad has really gone down in the past few years probably since the cold war came to an end.

 

You should be able to relate, but the US is an empire in decline. Like the British empire before us, we will inevitably see our influence wane as another empire rises. Asia seems like the most likely successor. I for one will enjoy not being the world's policemen for a change.

 

I'm not sure that there is another empire waiting in the wings at least as the West understands the term. The Chinese have never shown much interest in empire-building in the Anglo-American-European sense and other Asian nations even less so. Except for the Japanese, of course, but they proved pretty heavy-handed and incompetent in this endeavor.

As for our being the world's policeman, our paranoia, xenophobia, and hyped-up fear of Teh Terror will prevent us from giving up that role unless we really have no choice

 

It's going to be an interesting century. China has the advantage of going into the world with zero baggage. They have been buying mineral rights, mining companies, and hold the title on Saudi oil exploration. It has been their policy to not interfere in the internal politics of the host country. I wonder how long that will last.